Mandatory Regulation Impact Statement Bill 2025

High-Level Summary

The Mandatory Regulation Impact Statement Bill 2025 requires that a Regulation Impact Statement (RIS) be prepared and presented with every Commonwealth Bill or legislative instrument that is likely to have a regulatory impact, unless it is minor or technical in nature.

This measure codifies the existing Legislative Handbook 2017 requirement and extends it to non-Government Bills to boost transparency and strengthen parliamentary scrutiny.


Summary

The Mandatory Regulation Impact Statement Bill 2025 establishes a statutory obligation to include a Regulation Impact Statement in the Explanatory Memorandum for any Commonwealth Bill or legislative instrument likely to affect businesses, community organisations or individuals. A RIS must assess the likely costs and benefits of the proposal and consider alternative ways to achieve its policy objectives, in line with the standards of the Legislative Handbook 2017 and the Office of Impact Analysis.

  • The requirement applies to both Government and non-Government legislation, subject to exceptions for measures that are minor, technical or do not substantially alter existing arrangements.
  • Definitions of "explanatory statement" and "rule-maker" are drawn from the Legislation Act 2003, and the parameters of a RIS mirror existing Impact Analysis guidelines.
  • Clause 7 provides that a failure to prepare or present a RIS does not invalidate the legislation and that the content is not binding on any court or tribunal.
  • Parliamentary procedure is amended so that a Bill or instrument without a required RIS cannot proceed to a vote.

Argument For
Normative Bases
  1. Pro-Democracy
  2. Value-Neutral / Epistemic Objection
  3. Intellectualism

Mandating a Regulation Impact Statement ensures that both Parliament and the public can review the costs, benefits and alternatives of proposed laws before they are enacted. By embedding this requirement in statute, the Bill safeguards against arbitrary or inconsistent compliance, promoting more informed and accountable decision-making.

Transparent impact analysis helps prevent regulatory overreach and unintended harms, and it encourages departments to rigorously test policy options. Over time, this leads to better-designed legislation and greater public trust in the legislative process [Judgment].


Argument Against
Normative Bases
  1. Value-Neutral / Epistemic Objection
  2. Hobbesianism

Requiring a RIS for every non-Government Bill risks introducing significant delays and administrative burdens without clear evidence that such statements materially improve legislative quality. Many public servants already prepare impact analyses under existing guidance, making the statutory overlay largely duplicative [Judgment].

The extra procedural hurdle could slow Parliament’s ability to respond to urgent issues and deter backbenchers from introducing Private Members’ Bills, ultimately reducing the agility and diversity of Australia’s law-making process.


Date:

2025-11-03

Chamber:

Senate

Status:

Before Senate

Sponsor:

TYRRELL, Sen Tammy

Portfolio:

Unspecified

Categories:

Democratic Institutions, Civics

Timeline:
03/11/2025

Comments (0)